Skip to comments.Intelligent Design Book Cracks Bestseller List at Amazon.com
Posted on 11/17/2009 8:18:52 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
Signature in the Cell makes 2009 list of top ten bestselling science books
Today Amazon.com announced their bestselling books of 2009 and Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design (HarperOne) by Dr. Stephen C. Meyer made the top ten in the science category. According to Amazon.com, books on its 2009 list of best sellers are [r]anked according to customer orders through October. Only books published for the first time in 2009 are eligible. The book's publisher, HarperOne, reports that the book is entering its fifth printing in as many months, and continues to sell strongly both online and in stores.
Here we are, celebrating the 150th anniversary of the publication of Origin of Species, a book mistakenly assumed to have killed the design argument in science, said Robert Crowther, director of communications at Discovery Institutes Center for Science and Culture, which is the intelligent design research program directed by Dr. Meyer. Did Darwin refute the design argument? No. And heres a book about the science of intelligent design that shows how the design argument is being revived with powerful new arguments relevant to our culture.
In Signature in the Cell Dr. Meyer shows that the digital code imbedded in DNA points powerfully to a designing intelligence and helps unravel a mystery that Darwin did not address: how did the very first life begin? He weaves together a journey of discovery with an argument for intelligent design and explains how intelligent design can be formulated as a rigorous scientific argument using the very same method of reasoning that Darwin used.
Does this mean they’ll have to create a separate category for Intelligent Design books?
If the evos get their way, yes...must stop ID books from cracking the science bestseller list at all costs!
“Do not confuse materials like this from the Discovery Institute with actual scientific information. “
Nice drive by statement, anything in depth to add?
“does this man have any ethics or moral conscience? He still references that worthless essay paper he wrote and with Richard Sternberg snuck in the back door at the Smithsonian related publication. Unfortunately for Meyers, the journals’s editors actually had it peer-reviewed and the verdict came back -that Meyers’ essay had no scientific merit and duly retracted Meyer’s essay from publication. You can no longer find it in publication, only on the Dishonesty Institute’s web site where Meyers flaunts it as his “peer reviewed” publication. Sad indeed, that his book relies on this type of gibberish. “
Is this a science fiction or science non-fiction category?
What are the empirical metrics for intelligent design?
Richard Dawkins’ book is at #2, Robert Wright’s book on the “evolution of God” is #4, and Jerry Coyne’s book on why evolution is true is #5. Congratulations to Dr. Meyer on reaching #10.
Peer review. Operative item there, I would think. As if a review group composed of pro-evo theologians would approve of a dissenting voice.
Yeah. Can you imagine?
Someone looks at the order and complexity of the universe and the life in it and sees the information coded in DNA and has the gall to conclude that it was designed instead of just happening to self-assemble against all odds.
I mean, really. How stupid can one get to think that it didn’t all just happen by itself?
Might be an interesting read. According to the reviews, Meyer approaches the subject from a strictly scientific perspective, not a religious one.
Thanks for the ping!
Do wings on a bird have a purpose? Fins on a fish? Eyes? Fingers? Lungs? The answer to these questions is obviously ‘yes’. So how do you explain purpose without ‘intent’ and how do explain intent without ‘intelligence’? How did that first cell ‘accidently’ climbing out of the primordial soup come up with the notion of reproducing itself? Apparently it must have been one stout organism to survive the intense heat. Funny that no living organism today could withstand the proposed heat of that ancient cauldron. That original lifeform must not have passed that characteristic on to it’s evolutionary offspring.
The claim was that it was empirically verified. That means it has been demonstrated by some empirical measurement, and I asked what the metrics are that were used to verify it.
Do you wish to answer the question that was asked, and supply those metrics?
I read it from cover to cover, and found it excellent.
The universe is analog ... all organic and inorganic matter is analog ... All living mattter is analog ... All DNA is analog ..
Meyer's use of the term "digital" tells me that Meyer is an idiot.